OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Does the XML syntax have an underlying data model?

Rick Jelliffe:

> XML was not a planting exercise, but a pruning exercise.

Michael Key:

> XML (like so many technologies) was successful because it was done quickly, and that taking longer to do it better would probably have ensured an early death.

Private interests may find it politically useful to characterize demodularization as "pruning", but in engineering terms, it's still demodularization, and it's not necessarily in the public interest.

A more basic question is: Would it be good if information interchange standards were designed publicly, for world economic performance? Or not? Is the question academic? Or is it simply practical? It depends one's perspective. (One's perspective being subject to change!)

For example, consider a topic that is perhaps less fraught than XML Namespaces, at least within the XML community. Was the 7-layer OSI model in the public interest, or not? Would we be better off today if private interests had adopted it, or had been required to adopt it? If, for whatever reasons, private interests had adopted OSI, would we now enjoy more options in world communications, and a larger arena more suitable both for innovation *and* regulation?

More generally (and with thanks to Eric Raymond), does the bazaar really serve its own interests by neglecting its cathedral? Personally, I think not.

Steve Newcomb

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS